Bevo's Daily Roundup - July 23, 2010
by dimecoverage on Jul 22, 2010 9:06 PM CDT
in News
Email
Print
43 days (give or take a few hours).
Give that man a Heisman.
The eight-person Heisman Trust board will meet next week to determine not if Reggie Bush was the best player in college football in 2005, but whether the Southern Cal running back should keep his award signifying him as such.
The answer is a clear and resounding no, in both cases.
Vince Young was better that season, as he ultimately proved on that January night in Pasadena when Texas also won the national championship. He should receive the trophy retroactively because Bush deserves to be stripped of the honor after not upholding the values and ideals that the most prestigious award in all of sports embodies.
This problem isn't going away.
Florida coach Urban Meyer called agent malfeasance an "epidemic" on Wednesday. Alabama coach Nick Saban compared agents -- presumably not his own -- to the men who supervise prostitutes. SEC commissioner Mike Slive spoke of a need to change the NCAA's rules regarding agents from an enforcement model to an assistance model.
Three powerful men, essentially powerless to fight a group that works in the shadows and passes cash to players more seamlessly than the greasiest booster ever dreamed. In almost any other facet of college football, the coaches of the past two BCS champions and the commissioner of one of the nation's most powerful and lucrative conferences could affect change with a wave of the hand or with a nod of the head. But against the agents, the financial advisors and the runners, they can do nothing.
SEC coaches aren't the only ones concerned about agents.
“It’s all over the country,” Stoops told the Tulsa World in a telephone interview Thursday. “It’s been happening and it continues to get worse.”
Stoops echoed the sentiments of his colleague at Alabama, Nick Saban, who said on Wednesday the current system needs reevaluating. Saban said the same agent who got one of his players in trouble two years ago was still lurking — still apparently offering cash to players — because the agent was never penalized.
The NCAA has always cared about the influence of agents.
Oh, who am I kidding? The NCAA hasn't always cared about this. Not even close. The NCAA cared about agents like the average person cares about a single weed in the front yard: Sees it. Doesn't like it. Wishes it weren't there. But not about to get off the couch and do anything about it.
Meh. That was the NCAA's reaction to agents. Don't believe me? I can point to a flourishing patch of poison ivy to prove it, starting with Tank Black, the former sports agent who pumped so much money into the Florida football program that he was caught by the feds and sentenced to prison for seven years.
Black gave money to Jevon Kearse. He gave money to Mike Peterson. He gave money to Johnny Rutledge. He gave ... well, look. Maybe it would be easier to list the Gators he didn't shower with money. Point is, here's what the NCAA did to Florida:
Nothing.
Zero.
That was not unanimous.
The Big 12 might want to issue a correction — albeit a small and pretty darned meaningless one — about the media being unanimous in picking Nebraska’s football team to win the Big 12 North.
I didn’t pick the Cornhuskers — though given that Missouri plays at Nebraska, I probably should have and probably would now.
A call to the Big 12 office produced a very nice apology:
“Thanks, Mike. Sorry about the poll. All I can guess is it was either misplaced once I printed it off or the intern who assisted me accidentally miscalculated points. I’ll make sure your votes are counted for the preseason team.”
Tom Osbourne can't wait to get out of the Big 12.
Nebraska isn't waiting until next year to get involved in the Big Ten.
Athletic director Tom Osborne will be at the league's preseason meetings in Chicago early next month. Associate athletic director Marc Boehm says the former football coach will be able to provide input, but won't have a vote along with the other athletic directors until July 1, 2011.
The Pokes need to keep winning.
Yes, Boone Pickens' renovations have made State a much more attractive football entity. Yes, the Bedlam relationship — with the legislature watching, OU will be hard-pressed to leave behind OSU — is nice insurance for the Cowboys.
But there are no sure things. Not when your all-time football record is 10 games below .500. Not when you draw barely half as many fans as your chief rivals, despite setting school attendance records. Not when the roulette wheel creates fewer and fewer openings.
Which is why OSU must keep winning.
ESPN's David Ubben has six games that should earn some respect for the conference.
6) Oct. 16: Texas at Nebraska
Oh, yes. Put it this way: Nebraska's exit will be a much bigger deal if they leave as Big 12 champions than if they leave as second-place finishers in the North. If I'm Texas or Oklahoma and don't want the league to be perceived as significantly weaker, I'm cheering hard for Missouri to win the North. Texas has the best chance to hand the Huskers a conference loss, followed closely by Texas A&M and Missouri.
More 2009 stats from Barking Carnival.
Happy Friday.
BDR doesn't endorse any of the rubbish that is out there, we just link to it. If you happen to find something on the interwebs that might be of interest, please send the link to dimecoverage@gmail.com.
54 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Great video
I’m not working tomorrow, so I got to enjoy my Friday early. I knew that it would end on a great highlight.
VY-Yes, give that man the Heisman. VY won’t accept it, but he already proved he is the rightful owner. If the Heisman Trust and co. can’t get it right the first time, I sure don’t expect them to get it right on their second attempt.
2005 Heisman
I don’t think Bush should keep it as I have no doubts he knew what he was doing was against the rules. And though I’ve always believed VY deserved the Heisman that year, if I’m UT and/or VY, I wouldn’t want it now. It’s tainted. I don’t really have a good reason other than it just feels wrong to accept it now.
Curious to know how others feel about it?
Be nobody but yourself in a world that desperately wants you to be like everybody else.
I want him to have it
I know many say that the Heisman voting is flawed and doesn’t necessarily reflect who truly is the best, yadda yadda, but, at the end of the day, it’s kind of a big deal. Give the man what he earned. And giving it to VY would be the better way to remove the taint rather than just allowing it to remain vacant.
by Hopkins Horn on Jul 22, 2010 10:23 PM CDT up reply actions
Equally good argument
My counter to that would be simply that the reasons for taking it away from Bush and giving it to VY have nothing to do with what happened on the field of play. If Bush did something to give himself an unfair performance advantage, then I might be able to see making the switch, but not this way.
Be nobody but yourself in a world that desperately wants you to be like everybody else.
by 54b on Jul 22, 2010 10:32 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
Another way to look at the "taint"
The Heisman Trophy award for that season is “tainted” the same way the Longhorns UPI championship of 1970 is “tainted”, as both were awarded before the entire season’s body of work, bowl included, was completed. Notwithstanding the issue of Bush’s ineligibility, neither is tainted in the sense of being illegitimate, as UT can fairly claim 1970 amongst it championships, even under a strict scrutiny test and not just a lax, Alabama-style test, and Bush can claim that he won the Heisman fair and square. But just as no one really believes that Texas was the best team in the country once the bowls were played, it’s hard to imagine that a revote for the Heisman in the aftermath of the Rose Bowl, paranoid visions of a vast USC Media Conspiracy aside, would have resulted in anything other than a vote as lopsided in favor of VY as the original vote had been in favor of Reggie.
In other words, this isn’t a case of giving the trophy to someone who wasn’t really the best player in college football in 2005. This is the perfect storm to allow Heisman voters the opportunity to correct the mistake they made once they witnessed the two players on the same field at the same time.
by Hopkins Horn on Jul 22, 2010 10:43 PM CDT up reply actions
2005 MNC
It was pretty good proof that they should wait to vote until after the final game, but they haven’t changed the process so I don’t see them giving it to VY now.
But, I think they should give it to VY because-he was the second place vote getter and the first place vote getter has been ruled ineligible and stripped of it. I think it should be just like the Olympics. They give the gold years later to the rightful (non-cheating/doping, underaged, etc.) winner years later and that is a good standard. However, like I said originally, I think VY will ignore it since he won the MNC. But, the school should get to promote it since it he was the rightful winner as the NCAA compliant, non-cheating, top vote getter. I don’t think there should be a re-vote; It should just go to the top legit vote-getter which was VY.
It actually might have something to do with on the field play...
The level of comfort Bush was able to enjoy knowing that his family was well taken care of could, perhaps, offer him some peace of mind, devoid of stress from the other aspects of life which can create stress which can lead to under-performing. While I get this is not a direct correlation onto the field…much as a player who is stressed about his grades can be distracted, this too could have freed his mind to be the best he can be on the field. Just a thought.
"Stats are for losers. I like winning games." ~ Will Muschamp
"I always felt like, and I paid a price for it, that it didn't seem right for one guy to bring me down." ~ The Tyler Rose
"I'm Colt McCoy and I Am Second." ~ Colt McCoy
by Mulliganville on Jul 23, 2010 9:36 PM CDT up reply actions
Meh, the Heisman is like a beauty contest.
There is so much bias in the selection process that it tarnishes the award. It’s more about PR and exposure than actual performance. The voters are like a bunch of high school girls.
As far as Bohls, please. He can’t be serious. This attempt at revision is repulsive. Be a damn man and stand up for your decisions. The facts may later prove you were wrong but that’s life. I forgot that he voted for Reggie. Who cares.
I say let Reggie keep the trophy. It only further diminishes the image of the award. If the committee does decide to vacate the award and give to Vince, I hope he refuses to accept.
No do overs
I think your statements about the superficiality of the trophy are reason why I don’t want to see it now go to VY. In a sadistic sort of way, I don’t want to allow the Heisman voters a chance to correct what is still a perceived mistake and move along as if their award truly is legit.
If they’re going to keep on awarding the trophy the same biased-ignorant why they always have, then they need to live with the results.
Be nobody but yourself in a world that desperately wants you to be like everybody else.
TBNT
Would it be classless for VY to be offered the trophy and respectfully decline due to the circumstances? I think I agree about the tainting of the award, but also think he was/is deserving of it. I think that would reflect well on VY and Texas. Plus, I think the Heisman is a little overhyped and maybe even politically charged at times.
by Infield Elephant on Jul 23, 2010 9:49 AM CDT up reply actions
Best way to handle it
IMO would be for both VY to accept it, but to not make a big press conference or ceremony about it.
by Horncasting on Jul 23, 2010 10:28 AM CDT up reply actions
I change my mind
I think VY should accept the Heisman so he can have magic Earl-Ricky Wonder Twins power to turn ordinary Longhorns into upright anthropomorphic Longhorn football players that run into DKR with laser beams 3 minutes before every home game.
Be nobody but yourself in a world that desperately wants you to be like everybody else.
Hells yes.
Lasers always a good thing.
by Infield Elephant on Jul 23, 2010 12:49 PM CDT up reply actions
I hope Vince declines it
I feel like you, I don’t want Vince to sully himself with that dirty trophy. I would be OK with UT accepting their Heisman trophy for Vince and displaying it accordingly, while Vince refuses to acknowledge it. I don’t know how feasible that is though.
That video is incredible
No other sport is as emotionally complex as college football. Also, it frightens me that I watched a disgusting majority of those moments as they occurred.
You know, Urban, Nick, Stoopsie, Mike Slive . . .
If you guys would thoroughly check out your recruits and their backgrounds and (1) not make an offer to any player with an agent in trail, and (2) turn in to the NCAA and the Feds the names of street agents . . . I bet this problem would get a lot smaller real fast.
If you talk-out-of-both-sides-of-your-mouths hotshots care enough about the issue to comment on it publicly, then DO F-nnnnn SOMETHING ABOUT IT. Who’s better positioned to lead the cleanup effort?
Here's my take on the Heisman
They should strip bush of the award. He’s received the benefits he care’s about, which were the high (higher) draft choice and the money. The award should go to the the player with the most votes excluding bush. I think to determine this there has to be a re-vote. Although I think VY probably would garner most of those votes, the voters were cheated out of their opportunity to select from legitimate contenders. A re-vote in this case would almost certainly result in VY winning, however this will set a precedent for future proceedings should this occur again. It could be that the second and third place finishers be much closer in voting than 2005 would have been. I’ll definitely agree the voting should take place after the bowl games, which would reduce all the distractions the event places on contenders. It would also allow a player from a smaller school the opportunity to play in a bowl game and get some national exposure. Traditionally the Heisman goes to a player at one of the major universities (and maybe rightly so) that gets tons of exposure.
Re-vote doesn't make sense
Do you remember (without looking it up) who was third place, who was forth? Further, do you remember how they played and who they played against compared to similar players? VY would definitely win in a landslide because that year, the vote was pretty close anyway. Let’s say Joey Harrington was ruled ineligible. Who wins? That’s a very slippery slope when you cast revotes.
Yeah, I see your point
especially after 5 yrs. I knew matty was 3rd but after that ??? Maybe the thing to do is mark that year as vacated by reggie bush ‘douche bag’ so he is remembered. His picture is an empty frame hung on wall by itself leading to the lavatory.
a special place
hang it above the Heisman toilet
It's fun to do bad things. -Latarian Milton
by TexasGarcia37 on Jul 23, 2010 5:50 PM CDT up reply actions
Huh?
“I didn’t pick the Cornhuskers — though given that Missouri plays at Nebraska, I probably should have and probably would now.”
So you basically just admitted you don’t even look at the schedule when making your pre-season picks You probably would now? Why? What changed in the time in which you submitted the poll and now? And why write an article pointing out that the conference made a mistake in keeping your poll out of it’s final tally… but then saying that you had it wrong all along?
Holy hell, sportswriters are the lowest form of idiot.
Two teams can play each other head-to-head, and sportswriters still have to vote who they think is better.
by Longhorn_Seminole on Jul 23, 2010 8:35 AM CDT reply actions
The Heisman and UT
If the Athletic Dept. feels they could make a dime off VY getting the award, I’m sure they are doing everything they can to make sure it is awarded and accepted.
A framed signed print with Campbell, Williams, Young on it? Damn straight I’d buy one.
Speaking of Campbell and Williams
I think it is high time that VY was considered as prominantly as those 2 players in the intro videos, etc. I know they are differentiated because they actually won heismans, but VY did as much, if not more, and was every bit the dominant player (again, if not more).
by Horncasting on Jul 23, 2010 10:26 AM CDT up reply actions
Agreed. We're Texas
Since when do we wait for others to Validate what we know is true.
Forget the Heisman, VY in Confetti is all you need!
by HornsUpInLA on Jul 23, 2010 10:39 AM CDT up reply actions
I wonder how many Heisman winners would be different if they waited until after the bowl season
I’m actually fine with it as a “regular season award,” and I don’t view it very highly anyway, but it’s an interesting exercise.
2003 – Possibly Fitzgerald over White after the bowls, although Pitt lost their bowl game too. But they were 8-4 going into the game anyway.
2004 – Same
2005 – Yeah… we know
2006 – Actually still probably the same despite Troy Smith’s dud against Florida, because there frankly wasn’t much competition after Adrian Peterson got hurt that season.
2007 – Same. Tebow wasn’t that great against Michigan, but again, not much competition that year, and he did have a statistically nice season.
2008 – Might be different, and unfortunately, despite Tebow’s struggles against Oklahoma, it probably would have been him and not Colt. Because if the media can give anything to Tim Tebow, they will try their mightiest to do so.
2009- Same.
That’s just the last few seasons, but it actually does not seem like it would be much different. VY would get his Heisman for sure in that event, and Tebow might have another (the media adulation would be all the worse).
by TheElusiveShadow on Jul 23, 2010 1:31 PM CDT reply actions
In 2008 Colt might have had a shot after the bowls
He did have to lead a comeback two minute drill to win the Fiesta against tOSU.
Colt should have won it period.
Bradford had a great year and was worthy (no question there), but if Texas doesn’t lose to Tech or the TX/OU game was played at the end of the season instead of the middle, there is not doubt in my mind that Colt wins the Heisman and it’s not even close.
Still kills me.
I don’t think he deserved in 2009, but 2008 should have been his.
Be nobody but yourself in a world that desperately wants you to be like everybody else.
if, if, if
if OU doesn’t lose to texas, what is your argument for McCoy over Bradford?
On the field and statistically, there is no comparison between Bradford and McCoy in 2008. Bradford had, what, 60 TDs passing and running in 2008? That is simply ridiculous.
I guess that happens when...
…Stoops is running it up on Tech and throwing bombs w/ Bradford in the 4th.
by vy til i die on Jul 23, 2010 7:45 PM CDT up reply actions
I bet you're the kind of guy...
that screws a sheep in the butt and doesn’t offer the damn courtesy of a reach around.
Are you serious? You’re calling me out with the “if, buts, candy and nuts” defense and you begin your argument with “if OU doesn’t lose to Texas…” How ‘bout we change that to "if Colt doesn’t grab sack, instead of some other dude’s at the bar like OU fans do, and slaps OU’s Defense silly for 4 quarters?"
If you want to make it a stats off, go compare Colt’s rushing yards that year to Bradford’s? Let’s put it all on the table.
I readily admitted that Bradford was a worthy winner. But Colt did more than enough to win it too. And yes, he beat Bradford head to head. In my opinion, so we make that clear, Colt deserved it and lost it because of a late season loss and a reluctance of Mack Brown to put the throttle down in the 4th quarter of blow out games.
Bradford and OU also got to play an extra game in the Big XII Championship that was also decided by voters instead of on the field.
Can’t do anything about it. Congrats to Bradford. But that doesn’t change my opinion.
Be nobody but yourself in a world that desperately wants you to be like everybody else.
by 54b on Jul 23, 2010 9:44 PM CDT up reply actions 3 recs
You’re calling me out with the "if, buts, candy and nuts" defense and you begin your argument with "if OU doesn’t lose to Texas…"
Not calling you out on anything, just saying that using the “if this happens and this happens and this happens, then this is the result” to state your opinion is ludicrous.
Colt deserved it and lost it because of a late season loss and a reluctance of Mack Brown to put the throttle down in the 4th quarter of blow out games.
Sounds to me like Colt is an inferior QB to fellow Heisman candidate Graham Harrell (he lost to him, head-to-head, after all, and that matters, right?), and Mack wasn’t as dedicated as Stoops in trying to help his player win the Heisman. If it took blowout wins to get Bradford the attention needed to win the Heisman and help his team get to the national championship game, then Stoops did the right thing.
It's 2008, you're a Heisman voter, who wins?
A) The college football player with the best passing stats.
B) The best player on the #1 ranked team in the country.
C) The guy with great stats on a highly ranked team that also happens to be on TV a lot the last 3 weeks of the season (when most voters cast their votes) because the schedule happens to work out where he ends the season with two high profile games where his nearest competitor in the Heisman voting, who also had great stats, a highly ranked team, and even beat Candidate C head to head in an epic duel on a neutral field almost two months previous, had to end with Baylor, Kansas and hapless A&M, three games nobody cares about.
If A’s the answer, why didn’t Graham Harrell even get an invite to the Heisman ceremony?
If B’s your answer, then shouldn’t Tebow simply have won it for a 2nd time.
If C’s your answer, then you go with Bradford, but admit that the crazy thing about the Heisman is in any given year, all three of those criteria above have determined the winner.
My opinion wasn’t based on “ifs,” it was based on the fact that the voting for the Heisman is subjective and there are no hard and fast criteria from year to year for who wins. I was simply lamenting the fact that all things being what they were (stats, wins, outcomes), I’d wished a couple of factors (out of Colt’s control like timing of games, media coverage, and that odd ending out in Lubbock) had been different because based on what we’ve witnessed on several other Heisman campaigns, we can make a pretty good assumption that Colt would have won, especially if his higher profile games had come later in the season and his one loss earlier.
That’s it. Just an opinion, never purported as anything else.
And I would bet that 99% of the readers on this Website understood what I was talking about after reading my original post above. The only thing ludicrous here is why didn’t you?
Be nobody but yourself in a world that desperately wants you to be like everybody else.
not sure how the game result in Lubbock was out of McCoy's control
as I recall, he was part of the disappearing act put on by the texas offense in the first half of that game. Lead the offense to more production than just two FGs, and you might be looking at a different result.
Simply put, he had a chance to get all of the exposure he needed and win the award in that one game, and he didn’t do it.
Just answer one question:
Who wins the Heisman if Giddean cradles that gift of an interception after Colt lead the Horns all the way back to take the lead?
Be nobody but yourself in a world that desperately wants you to be like everybody else.
Colt had 45 (34P + 11 rushing with 561 rushing yards)
Bradford had 55 (50P + 5 rushing on 47 rushing yards total)
You exaggerate by five TDs.
The difference between Sam and Colt was not that much, considering the extra game, and is certainly not ridiculous.
Bradford did lose on the field, head-to-head, when it counted. No fricking ‘ifs’ about it.
And you could have discovered the accurate figures just as easily instead of giving in to hyperbole. .
And you could have discovered the accurate figures just as easily instead of giving in to hyperbole.
But what would he have left?
If Bradford were a Longhorn, he would have been subjected to season-long taunting last season for not playing through an injury literally millions of quarterbacks play through on a daily business.
by Hopkins Horn on Jul 24, 2010 10:50 AM CDT up reply actions
I honestly doubt that there are millions of quarterbacks in the world
let alone millions who have that specific injury, and play through it. Just saying.
To be clear...
…this was directed at those who engage in hyperbole while mocking the injuries of quarterbacks from the safety of their mommies’ basements.
I personally am aware that there probably aren’t millions of quarterbacks in the world. :)
by Hopkins Horn on Jul 24, 2010 11:52 AM CDT up reply actions
hear that whooshing sound?
Aggies are still trying to figure out what it is.
Other Receiving Votes: Oklahoma
by pleaseplaykindle on Jul 26, 2010 12:48 PM CDT up reply actions
Bradford had, what, 60 TDs passing and running in 2008?
hence I said this as a question, not as a statement of fact.
For some reason, I remembered Bradford having more rushing TDs than 5, I honestly thought he had hit double-digits in passing and rushing TDs, but the exact number is irrelevant; to be responsible for scoring 55 TDs is phenomenal.
Are you some kind of cartoon character?
Stranger danger! Leave us alone bad man!!!!
Yee-haw!!!
by UT2001 on Jul 23, 2010 11:46 PM CDT via mobile up reply actions
Seriously. chills.
so happy they used the craig way call.
Other Receiving Votes: Oklahoma
by pleaseplaykindle on Jul 23, 2010 4:17 PM CDT up reply actions
His pose in the confetti
Is unquestionably the college football image of the decade.
by TheElusiveShadow on Jul 23, 2010 4:51 PM CDT up reply actions
100% Sure Bush Loses Heisman and Vince Takes It Without Re-Vote
The Heisman Award is for the best “amateur” football player in the country. As soon as Bush violated that standard – it will force the Heisman committee to take the award away. So I am 100% sure Bush loses the recognition in the official record.
I am worried that there would be a 10% chance that Heisman would vacate the trophy instead of awarding to Vince.
and what if they choose to do nothing?
I’m not sure the Heisman committee will decide to change anything; seems ridiculous to go back and try to change everything five years after the fact. If you set that precedent, what is to stop people from searching for ways to invalidate other Heisman winners after the fact?
I would not be surprised if they did nothing
But how would this start a precedent? You seem to be implying that if they strip Bush of his award, everyone else is in trouble, but that is only if they, too, are found guilty of major NCAA violations that eliminate their amateur status. We’re not talking about doing re-votes just for the heck of it.
by TheElusiveShadow on Jul 24, 2010 8:34 PM CDT up reply actions
They Won´t Do Nothing - Book It
You see the ceremony every year. They act like it is the most important thing in the world. If they knowingly let a professional athlete keep the award – it will take some luster of the trophy. Look what USC did – they sent back the trophy!!!! How could the Heisman stuffed shirts accept back the replica from USC and ignore the real one?
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
